What's new

Interesting debate on existance of god, worth a read

Status
Not open for further replies.

RPGlover12

New member
sk8bloke22 said:
nope. i dont believe in judasim, pretty much made it clear that i dont believe in god, which means i cant really believe in my religion and all the bullshit it comes with. i understand that i am jewish, thats my identity...as in the holocaust even the most unreligious jews got persecuted, so i cant run away from the fact that i am jewish. i just dont believe in it as a truth. and wats to stop me saying that, ur book RPGlover is totally wrong and the torah is right. obviously i wouldnt say that as it is a pointless arguement. the way something is truly concrete evidence is if it can be proved with concrete maths. otherwise, its just unreliable in proving it as fact. Nazi's saw Hitler's Mein Kampf as the truth...it clearly wasnt, but its the same idea. Hitler presented some metaphysical ideas that made sense to those in Germany ( i study Germany History so i know quite a lot about this). Now we would argue completely against it...now evolutionists do the same with creationalist theory. (and visa-versa).

but yeh, im meant to believe that the messiah will come and restore the temple that was destroyed (the temple did exist, the Western Wall that still stands is the only main part that still remains since its destruction).
how can u prove me that my book is wrong sk8bloke when its the one that hasn't been changed from when it came
and if u wanna be sure of it there is the first quran in the whole world in turkey its still there as just as our now book
 
OP
sk8bloke22

sk8bloke22

roll for life
RPGlover12 said:
how can u prove me that my book is wrong sk8bloke when its the one that hasn't been changed from when it came
and if u wanna be sure of it there is the first quran in the whole world in turkey its still there as just as our now book

hmmm...ull neva if that is 100% true. and ur right i cant 100% prove the quaran wrong. thats not the point. doesnt mean its correct. in that sense u cant prove the torah or bible wrong, i know that some rabbis justify things for judasim over islam...just as u hav done with the quaran, sayign the quaran says this...which proves judasim wrong. it means nothing. absolutely nothing. the fact that ive (using mostly oother ppls material) been able to prove that evolution is true is different. ive used scientific means to do so, the fact that it is easy for me to locate mathmatical therom concerning the laws of thermodynamics even further supports my point. u cant argue with maths.

and 2fast4u...Marxist theory is very interesting. just finished learning it at school. i mean it is also totally flawed, if i was a socialist i would agree more with gramsci than Marx, but still he has been a very influencial person in world history. its just a shame lenin and stalin went and ruined the image of his theory. now Marxism is associated with the practically fascist regime that stalin led.

definitely agree with Marx's idea of flase consciousness...religion is completely that.
 

2fast4u

New member
sk8bloke22 said:
its just a shame lenin and stalin went and ruined the image of his theory. now Marxism is associated with the practically fascist regime that stalin led.

well we could kinda argue about this now. while lenin, as the leader of the revolution, was a true follower of marx' theory (he was a former student of him) and attempted to build a socialist society in russia, which never succeeded - stalin was a ruthless fascist who mistreated communism and used it as disguise to build a fascist dictatorship. it's an irony of history that socialism, which should have brought the beginning to a better world ("Jesus Christ was the first socialist, the first one to seek a better life for mankind" -Michael Gorbatchev) was used as such. i believe lenin on the side of the "true" socialists like che guevara and rosa luxemburg.

totalitary systems like china or cuba did and still do great damage to the word "socialism" even thu neither one these are actually socialist states.
 

RPGlover12

New member
sk8bloke22 said:


hmmm...ull neva if that is 100% true. and ur right i cant 100% prove the quaran wrong. thats not the point. doesnt mean its correct. in that sense u cant prove the torah or bible wrong, i know that some rabbis justify things for judasim over islam...just as u hav done with the quaran, sayign the quaran says this...which proves judasim wrong. it means nothing. absolutely nothing. the fact that ive (using mostly oother ppls material) been able to prove that evolution is true is different. ive used scientific means to do so, the fact that it is easy for me to locate mathmatical therom concerning the laws of thermodynamics even further supports my point. u cant argue with maths.

well i can proof that the torah is not all of it is true buti can't prove 100 percent of it maybe because now torah isn't changed much because u've made the final edit is ur book but in the old days there were many copies
ok lets go with proof 1-ok quran was never changed so that means that it can't be untrue and torah has changed alittle so i can prove that their been somestuff untrue
2-there are many things that new science just discovered and its been written in the quran
3-quran and muhammed(may allah peace and blessing be upon him) everything that they said was true like muhammed said that there will be an age that most muslims will be unreligous and all of the minor signs will happen and after that the major signs and it did happen most of the arabian countries are unreligous like Egypt lebanon , syria , united arab emirates , and iraq those are the one who are a little unreligous but others like saudia etc.. are very religous so he said the truth
and i told u before about the scientest who researched about the soul that comes to the baby at a certain day and he found out that it was true
 
OP
sk8bloke22

sk8bloke22

roll for life
RPGlover12 said:
[B
and i told u before about the scientest who researched about the soul that comes to the baby at a certain day and he found out that it was true [/B]

wheres this? science isnt fact. its an observation of events that MUST be open to objection. otherwise it cannot be science. to me that doesnt even sound like a scientific experiement, as science has neva found evidence for a soul. so i definitely do not believe it. if u can find on the net, i would love to see it.

back to Marx...

i dont think u can completely claim lenin as a true 'Marxist' as he was only concentrated on the revolution, and it is not really known how far he believed in the 'withering away of the state'. although Marx claimed his observation of history to prove the 'inevitable' future. a claim that breaches on the same lines of religion in that he is presented an axium or truth that cant really be sufficiently proved as definite. lenin didnt believe the revolution to be inevitable, and like gramsci saw that history can be influenced by humans. so im not sure how close lenin was following his revolution to Marxist theory. although, with out a doubt, lenin did not want stalin to take over. apparently on his deathbed he pleaded for stalin not to become leader.

also quite interestingly class conflict is apparently going exactly as Marx predicted. according to some recent surveys and economical observations, the gap between economical classes is, in fact, widening. which would suggest that class conflict is infact worsening. also this whole thing with the 'middle-class' could be argued as another capatilist sign of flase consciousness.

Marxist theory is very much flawed due to a failure by Marx to fully explain the revolutionary period and exactly the 'withering away of the state'. it seems difficult, for me anyway, to see that once in power the dictatorship will wither away and give up their power. as lord acton said 'power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely' .



....2fast4u, plz keep this up, this is good revision for my exams coming up at the end of the month.
 

2fast4u

New member
actually i doubt that the path to revolution that marx described is accurate. based on the situation of the early 20. century and the major european powers as well as (later) the united states in an imperialist conflict marx advocated that history must lead to the proletarian revolution in every country one after one. at the end of this process is a world unified under socialism which lives in equality and solidarity to each other.

history told us that the process attempted to start (persons like lenin and trotzki succeeded with the revolution in russia and similar attempts in germany where almost successful --> see also the bavarian republic) but wasn't successful in the end.

now we are heading to a similar situation like in marx' time: the great powers of the world (usa, france, germany, england - deja vu) are moving on to imperialist activities. the so-called "war against terror" is only one fact.

u are right with saying that the class conflict is getting worse. in fact it's just showing up again.

marx wasn't right with his thesis that revolution is unavoidable and lenin was right not to act according to this thesis.
lenin also replaced the marxist' theory of a completely state-controlled economy with the nep (new economy policy, 1921). i think no ideal can be applied completely. the details of marxism are often times theory and not appliable, i admit that as a socialist. the principles of marxism, socialism however are equality, freedom, democratic rights and solidarity which lenin respected and practiced in the early times of the ussr.

(phew. im really kinda running out of vocabulary with this complex subject right now)

if u will im gonna write about the failures of the 3. international but that later.
 

2fast4u

New member
additions:

there are the different forms of socialism which include revisionism which doesn't attempt the revolution and only shares the power with the capitalists. stalinism (sadly enough) which is a completely perverted form of socialism. and so-called communism which is an autocratic form of socialism.

i personally advocate liberal socialism which is a mix from revisionism, marxism, communism and anarchism.
 
OP
sk8bloke22

sk8bloke22

roll for life
why, its a good topic?

yeh evolutionary socialism. (such a boring topic, goddamn evolutionaries..), evo socsialism has quite just become part of liberalism, in britain anyway, where u get ppl like Blair, originating from a socialist party, still saying "we need to build a collective community" but then going onto complete new-right conservative thinking, which is basically step back to classical liberalism, i.e free-market economy.

i suppose the democratic socialists like Tony Benn had the most revolutionary stance out of all the Evo-Socialists . now they;re just backbench MPs. :colgate: u probably hav no idea wat im saying as this is all british politics.
 
OP
sk8bloke22

sk8bloke22

roll for life
the topic wasnt gonna go anywhere in the first place. the arguement about god is neva gonna be settled.
 

2fast4u

New member
true. i ain't gonna start arguing 'bout that. we could make a new topic and discuss socialism & capitalism ... ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top